Christian Schneider

Author, Columnist

Search results: "me 35" (page 4 of 8)

What Happened to Good ol’ Arrogance?

August 20, 2009 / / 1 Comment

By now, the routine is familiar.  Big name office holder leaves.  Big name office opens up.  A variety of characters of disparate seriousness crop up to announce they’re “thinking ” about running for the vacant spot.  The public goes back to watching “The Bachelorette.”

We saw this in action this week, when Governor Doyle announced he wouldn’t be seeking a third term.  Immediately, presumptive Democratic replacements began leaking their names to the press as possibilities to run.  Lieutenant Governor Barb Lawton.  Congressman Ron Kind.   Milwaukee Mayor (and amateur pugilist) Tom Barrett.  Even State Senator Jon Erpenbach jumped in the pool of Democratic possibilities.

Now is the time where politicians start throwing out my favorite phony campaign line – the famous “I’m running because a bunch of people are calling me to tell me to” schtick.

Take Ron Kind, who in his statement on Monday said:

Since Governor Doyle’s decision has become public, people from around the state have contacted me and urged me to run for Governor. I thank them for their support and I am considering it. In the weeks to come I will make my decision.

Erpenbach followed up by telling the Wisconsin State Journal that “he was being urged to consider a run for governor but would have to talk with his family and friends before deciding.”  Democratic Assembly Speaker Mike Sheridan said he’s “heard from some people around the state,” encouraging him to consider a run.  Potential Republican hopeful Bill McCoshen said “”I’ve gotten a lot of calls in the last 24 hours, I’ll tell you that,” when commenting on his run.  GOP Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen said he is being encouraged by supporters to run but, “as of today, his focus is on re-election.”

Somehow, this phony humility has crept into our politics – as if these guys are going to make their decision to run for the state’s highest office based on a couple people’s phone calls.  Why is it that candidates can’t just say “look, I think I have a lot of good ideas, and I’d like to see them affect as many people as possible?”  Do we really want someone running that plays the “I really didn’t want to run, but more than six people called me!” card?

Obviously, if you’re even thinking of running for governor, you believe you have something to offer. (Or in some cases, you are delusional.)  So why couch it in this bogus “depends on how many people call me” nonsense?  And do we really want a governor that makes big decisions based on whether a couple of sycophants that will probably benefit from his decision give him or her a call?

While nobody will ever confuse supermodels with Wisconsin candidates for governor, the same false humility applies in that profession.  Mark it down – any time someone asks a super hot model how she got into modeling, the answer is always something like “my aunt forced me to go to this magazine cover shoot tryout against my will,” or “I was always an ugly duckling, and somehow lucked into a modeling gig,” or some such nonsense.

You’ll never hear a model say “Well, one day I woke up, looked at myself in the mirror, and realized that the person staring back at me was incredibly hot, so I hired an agent, stopped eating, and hit the modeling circuit.”  While that would be honest, it violates some sort of basic level of self-effacing false humility that we require our celebrities to have.

I, for one, subscribe to the Frank Lloyd Wright school of false humility:

Early in life I had to choose between honest arrogance and hypocritical humility. I chose the former and have seen no reason to change.

A Long Path to the Long Ball

June 7, 2009 / / 4 Comments

Admit it – there’s no more special moment in American sports than seeing someone hit a home run.  Hitting a long ball imparts super-human status on an athlete, setting them apart from the rest of us couch potatoes.  In the back of our minds, we all think we could hit a jump shot in basketball or catch a touchdown pass in football.  But hitting a ball over a fence hundreds of feet away requires a singularly special skill, of which only a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of the general public possesses.

To date, it was a skill I had never acquired.  I played high school baseball for three years, although to say I “played” is a bit of a misnomer.  I was a “member of the team.”  When I graduated, I was a rail-thin 5 foot 9, 135 pounds.  Television stations in Ethiopia should have had telethons for me, I was so emaciated.  As such, I was not exactly what you would call a “power hitter.”  And as such, I didn’t exactly get a lot of what you would call “playing time.”  (When people asked me what position I played, I said “left out.”)

I tried everything to be a stronger hitter.  I sat in class squeezing those spring contraptions that are supposed to strengthen your forearms.  I actually did eye exercises that were supposed to strengthen the muscles around your eyeballs, helping you see the ball better.  (This was before college, when I started drinking alcohol specifically for the purpose of helping me see a lot worse.)

I taught myself to bat left-handed, carrying Ted Williams’ book “The Science of Hitting” in my backpack everywhere I went.  I idolized Williams, because he threw right-handed and hit left, just like I was trying to do.  I wanted to craft the perfect swing from scratch, and broke it down to the inch, using videotape and the illustrations Williams had in his book.  (I taped every Will Clark at bat I could, to try to emulate his swing, as well.)  The benefit of Williams’ system was that you didn’t have to be a big, muscular guy to hit the ball hard – after all, he was rail-thin throughout his career.  The obvious downside was, you have to be Ted Williams to be able to pull it off – he was a freak of nature.

None of it worked.  I languished on the bench, a singles hitter at best.  I tried to stay as active as possible when I could – I’d go out and warm up the right fielder between innings, play bullpen catcher to get relief pitchers loose, and pitch batting practice before games.  (Which was ideal, since my best fastball was a perfect batting practice pitch.)

But sitting the bench was still humiliating.  Especially since the girl I was completely in love with went to a lot of the games.  I\’d be out in left field for warmups before the game, and I’d be able to see her large hairspray teased mane sitting in the stands.  (This was 1989, after all.)  Then during the game, I’d disappear from the field, and she’d never see me again.  As if I was never on the team at all.

My junior year, our team was terrible.  Our coach tried every lineup and combination possible – except playing me.  There was one game in particular that I thought for sure he’d start me, just to give me a shot.  But when I checked the lineup card, my name wasn’t on it.  When I took my spot in the outfield for pre-game warmups, tears started streaming down my face.  If I wasn’t going to play now, I never would – and I proved that for once, there was crying in baseball.

I didn’t even try out for the team my senior year.  Instead, I played tennis.  Working so hard to be a good hitter and not playing was too painful to bear.  This probably caused some consternation with my dad, who was a baseball star at Pius XI in Milwaukee, and went on to play on the team at West Point.  I didn’t pick up a bat again until college, when I played some intramural softball with my fraternity’s team.  We were actually good enough to win our whole university’s tournament and make it to the state intramural tournament.  After that, my career lay essentially dormant until this year, when I signed up to play for the Club Tavern co-ed softball team with some friends.

And so it was this Friday night that a 36 year-old former high school baseball player walked up to the plate.  I would be completely unrecognizable to the 17 year old high school kid I once was.  60 pounds heavier, every bone and muscle aching – after each game, I have to pack my entire body in ice and gobble ibuprofen like they’re tic-tacs.

Ball one came.  I was looking to pull one to right field, as I normally do, which really should be considered cheating – since teams traditionally put the person in right field that is only playing because their spouse is making them.  You get a lot of real beauties out in right – people in wheelchairs, people with one leg, dyslexics, etc.  Trying to hit it to right is as much cheating as using steroids is, with the benefit that your onions don’t fall off.

Then came the second pitch – it was clearly a strike, on the inside portion of the plate.  My devious plan to steal a hit by hitting it to right field was about to come to fruition.  But after it left the bat, it did a strange thing.  It kept going.  And going.

I took one step forward, watching the bright white ball climb up further into the dark night sky.  It was a 10:00 PM game, so the softball complex had all but completely cleared out, leaving only family members and their dogs in the stands.  At the point in which the ball usually starts dropping it kept rising.  Get up, get up…

The right fielder, who had been playing almost with her back to the wall, stopped moving, and looked up – just like you see in major league games when an outfielder watches one sail over their head and into the stands.  I took another step forward, incredulous to what was happening.

Then, the ball disappeared over the right field wall…

Foul.

It had cleared the wall by a good 10 feet, but had curled around the right field pole.

Two pitches later, I struck out looking.  In slow-pitch softball.

Our team won, pushing our record to 6-1.  But my longball-that-wasn’t kept nagging me.  Just ten feet to the left, and I would have hit my first home run in my life, at any level.  (The fact that it came at age 36 would have immediately gotten me a mention in the next Mitchell Steroids report, I’m pretty sure.  Right next to Fernando Vina’s skinny beard.)  But how many of those dopes that played ahead of me in high school can say they\’re still hitting home runs?  How many of those guys who got all the playing time while working half as hard as I did can still spray line drives all over the field after a decade of retirement?  Most importantly, does anybody know where my girl from high school lives, so I can send her this picture of the swing? (Damn crappy blurry camera.)

After the game, I went to my car to change out of my cleats and into my sandals.  A girl on my team drove by and asked me if I wanted the ball I hit over the fence.  She pointed to the parking lot across the street, where the softball sat alone, right in the middle of the lot.  Nobody had even bothered to go pick it up.  I ran across the street in my socks, gave it a kiss, and triumphantly held it up – a souvenir that meant nothing to everyone except me.

Daily Links

May 13, 2009 / / 1 Comment

For as much time as I spend on the internet, you\’d think I would have seen most of this stuff before now – but some friends sent me a bunch of funny stuff today that I had missed, so here it is.

Check out actual resumes and cover letters at nothired.com.

I hadn\’t seen Eugene Mirman, but this stand-up special is pretty good:
Eugene Mirman Comedy Special Part 2

Some guy named Zach Galifianakis interviews Natalie Portman: (I know this is kind of the \”Chris Farley Show\” schtick from SNL, but it\’s still funny)

And an even funnier version, with \”Mad Men\’s\” Jon Hamm:

Observing the Law of Rule

March 23, 2009 / / 0 Comments

The summer of my twelfth year, my father dictated to me my summer job: I was going to have to paint the picket fence around our backyard. I had never painted anything before, so I punished him by peppering him with inane questions. “Where do I start?” “What size brush should I use?” And so on. “I don’t care how you do it – just get it done!” he snapped. At least that’s what I think he said, as my ears were ringing from the accompanying smack upside my head.

As it turns out, state law very much follows “dad law.” When the legislature passes a law and the governor signs it, it constitutes a directive – “paint the fence.” But in many cases, it leaves the minute details up to the state department that will be carrying out the broad new law – “just get it done.” Departments accomplish the “I don’t care how you do it” part by passing “rules,” which reside comfortably in legal purgatory, somewhere between real laws and complete anarchy.

In many cases, the Legislature leaves their newly passed statutes overly broad, to avoid codifying every little detail in state law. For instance, state law dictates what crimes will land you in jail. Rules determine what kind of nudie magazines you will be allowed to view when you’re in the joint. Rules govern everything from how big a pier you can have on your house to what classes your barber has to take to obtain a license, including – and this is not a joke – 35 “theory hours” of “Shaving, beard and mustache shaping and trimming.” Who can forget Aristotle’s treatise on mustache waxing?

Yet rules, while having the force of law, are passed in a peculiar way that circumvents the traditional legislative process – and opens the door for hijinks. Rules changes are drafted by a department, then sent to standing legislative committees, who may then object to the rule if they believe it to be a bad idea. If it draws an objection, the rule goes to the Joint Rules Committee, where it can be suspended. However, if it is suspended, the committee must introduce bills changing the law to remedy their percieved problem with the rule. If those bills do not pass, the rule goes into effect – without ever having been altered by the legislature.

Thus, in effect, rules are like laws in reverse. Whereas passing a new law requires a bill proactively passing through both houses and being signed by the governor, rules essentially start as law and require bipartisanship to invalidate them. Thus, in the case of a split Legislature, one party can always block an objection to a rule made by their party’s governor.

This has become increasingly problematic in recent years, when departments are taking more liberties with their rulemaking authority. Instead of merely carrying out the directives given them by state law, some departments are granting themselves entirely new lawmaking ability, knowing that a split legislature will likely pave the way.

For instance, the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board has voted to promulgate a rule that grants their members the sole legal authority to regulate campaign advertising during election season. While the law creating the GAB merely charges them with enforcing current election law, they have decided to settle this contentious issue that has confounded the U.S. Supreme Court for decades by merely making up their own law. This isn’t painting the fence – this is building a whole new picket fence that runs right through our living room.

Other rulemaking attempts have been equally as brazen. In 2005, Governor Jim Doyle actually attempted to raise the state’s minimum wage via administrative rule, knowing that he could simply veto any bill passed by Republicans if they attempted to object to the change. The State Supreme Court is attempting to use the rules process to wrestle legislative redistricting away from the Legislature, which clearly usurps legislative authority to set its own Senate and Assembly districts. Recently, the Supreme Court enacted a rule that changes the instances when tribal courts have jurisdiction over non-tribal members, which will have the effect of denying many litigants their right to a trial by a Wisconsin court. In a blistering dissent, Justice Patience Roggensack observed the new rule “undermines federal and state constitutional and statutory rights of litigants.”

New laws are the bright, shiny new baubles on which we all like to gaze. Enacting them takes all the elements of a good political novel – intrigue, secret deals, undue influence, and bloated, self-important speeches on the legislative floor. On the other hand, administrative rules have all the sexiness of Jim Doyle in spandex bike pants. In fact, in contrast to laws, rules only actually pass when nobody thinks to publicize them. But like Doyle’s bike pants, the rulemaking process is beginning to expand beyond the limit set by law (and good taste.) Maybe these bureaucrats need my dad to smack them in the head with a paintbrush.

-March 23, 2009

I\’ve Got a Fever for More Schneider

March 15, 2009 / / 2 Comments

I wrote an editorial for the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that appeared on Sunday.  Most people haven\’t read it.

Guess who\’s recession-proof?

By Christian Schneider

Posted: Mar. 14, 2009

For the past year, workers around Wisconsin have been flinching when the phone rings. They don\’t want the next call they get to be the one where they find out they\’ve been laid off.

In late February, the state Department of Workforce Development reported what workers in Wisconsin already knew: Employment in the state was falling like a heifer dropped from an airplane. According to DWD, Wisconsin lost 72,500 private-sector jobs in the past year, causing the unemployment rate to leap to 7.6% – up 2.7 percentage points from last January. These unemployment numbers simply codified the pain families across the state are feeling as their loved ones struggle to cope with losing their jobs.

In the midst of the sagging job market, however, there is one sector that appears to be recession-proof. According to the DWD, while the private sector was hemorrhaging, government increased by a shocking 900 jobs. That\’s right – the same people who are supposed to turn this economy around haven\’t actually felt any of the pain. While families across the state are learning to cope with job loss, our government has circled the wagons to protect their own – demonstrating that they just don\’t get it.

The fact that the government continues to grow in a terrible economy actually explains the government\’s misguided response to the recession. Elected officials believe the salve for an ailing economy is to simply do what they know how to do best – continue to add more government jobs. They look at private-sector job loss as evidence that the private economy cannot be trusted to employ people on its own, and they are doing their best to shift jobs back over to the government dole. According to the nonpartisan Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance, fringe benefits for public employees run 50% higher than those in the private sector – so taxpayers will be asked to subsidize more expensive government jobs while they\’re losing their own.

And, thus, the regular carpenters, electricians and plumbers must pay for the continued excesses of all levels of government. According to the Federal Reserve, Americans lost 18% of their net worth in 2008, for a total loss of $11.2 trillion. Yet Gov. Jim Doyle\’s proposed state budget incorporates $2.2 billion in new taxes, including massive new taxes on the same businesses that represent our only hope of boosting employment in the state. These punitive taxes are meant to close a $5.9 billion deficit created by our elected officials, who now must face the consequences for spending well beyond taxpayers\’ ability to pay.

The growth in government jobs as incomes in the state recede further explains the fiscal dreamland in which our elected officials continue to reside. Minimum wage hikes, climate change regulations, sick leave mandates and higher job taxes all will serve to purge employees from business payrolls. Amid the squealing of public school teachers, the obeisant Doyle has vowed to eliminate the qualified economic offer, which guarantees teachers a 3.8% pay and benefits increase every year. Teachers complained about their pay being too low -think there\’s any recently laid-off employee of Harley-Davidson who wouldn\’t saw off his left leg for a QEO about now?

If you like the way Doyle and the Legislature have run the state government into the ground, you\’ll absolutely love it when they detonate your place of work. If they\’re half as effective at immolating the private sector as they have been in ruining government, then you can look forward to being dependent on an underfunded government program in no time.

And if our elected officials continue to pad their own jobs while costing us ours, it might be time to make them wait by the phone.

Christian Schneider is a senior fellow at the Wisconsin Policy Research Institute.

Your Packer Draft Preview

February 21, 2009 / / 3 Comments

Saturday\’s Milwaukee Journal Sentinel speculates that the Green Bay Packers may take Ole Miss left tackle Michael Oher with the #9 pick in the first round.  I am now kicking myself, as I was going to do a post last week suggesting they take Oher, which would have made me look a lot smarter than I actually am.

Fans of the author Michael Lewis may remember Michael Oher as the subject of his outstanding 2007 book \”The Blind Side.\” The book traces the recent history of the left tackle in football, and why left tackles have become among the highest paid positions on the football field.  The book begins with a chapter about Lawrence Taylor breaking Joe Theismann\’s leg, and how Taylor\’s ability to devastate quarterbacks revolutionized the game.  Due to a combination of  LT killing quarterbacks and Bill Walsh inventing more pass-happy offenses, protecting the quarterback\’s blind side has become the key to having an effective offense.

Oher grew up in Memphis, in the third poorest zip code in America.  He had 12 brothers and sisters, who were barely attended to by his crack-addicted mother.  (His father had been murdered.)  He had been in and out of foster homes, and rarely attended school – yet the Memphis public schools continued to move him through with the minimum GPA necessary.  At age 15, the father of a friend drove him out to East Memphis to try to get him into a virtually all-white Evangelical school, inhabited by Memphis\’ most wealthy families.  When he showed up, he didn\’t speak, and couldn\’t read or write – but his sophomore year, he was 6 foot 5, 350 pounds, as nimble as a cat.  Naturally, his prowess in sports gave him a chance at this school that he may not normally have had.

A wealthy white family in Memphis took him in and made him their foster son.  They pushed him to excel in school, and eventually he began to open up.  He also became the most sought after high school offensive lineman in the country, with college coaches flooding to his school to marvel at his athletic ability.  By the time he graduated, he had overcome his 0.4 GPA to make the honor roll, and he committed to play at the alma mater of his foster parents, Ole Miss.

As is the case with any of Lewis\’ books, Oher\’s story is only partially about football.  It posits some difficult societal questions – how many black kids are we letting rot in the inner cities without an education simply because they don\’t have any athletic ability?  How many kids do we mistakenly give up on because we think they have no capacity to learn, when their emotional problems are mainly a result of their horrific upbringing?  Oher walked into East Memphis a severely emotionally damaged 15 year-old that society had given up on – yet through the love and care of this Evangelical family, he grew into a fully-formed, mature young man.  How many other kids are out there, just like him?

In any event, it would be great if the Packers could draft him and serve as the final chapter in this astounding success story.  It also happens that he\’s an amazing left tackle.

Here\’s a video that runs through some of Oher\’s travails:

You need to a flashplayer enabled browser to view this YouTube video

When is it NOT Bacon O\’Clock?

January 13, 2009 / / 0 Comments

The College Affordability Myth

December 3, 2008 / / 2 Comments

Today’s Milwaukee Journal Sentinel features a blaring headline warning that some group has given Wisconsin an “F” in helping students with college financial aid.  Sounds pretty serious  – we must really be falling behind other states in offering financial aid, huh?

Well, actually, no.  Forty-nine of the fifty states got grades of “F” for affordability, which might make one think this bogus “study” might just be a crass ploy by the National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education to push for more taxpayer money.  And one would be right.  Couldn’t the Journal Sentinel just as easily have written the headline “Wisconsin Keeping Up With College Affordability?”

You may notice that college “affordability” to university bureaucrats always means “more taxpayer money,” never “keeping tuition down.”  Universities never like to keep college affordable by charging less for their services – they only consider college attainable when they can jack up tuition, then get the state to pump more taxpayer money in to subsidize the college educations of the poor.  This allows them to continue paying their armies of administrators their lavish salaries.  They get you coming and going.

In fact, in terms of “affordability” in the sense normal people would define the word, Wisconsin is doing extremely well.  Wisconsin ranks second to last in the Big Ten in tuition, even after Governor Jim Doyle proposed significant increases in the 2004 and 2005 school years.  Here’s the list of resident undergraduate tuition at Midwestern Big Ten schools, courtesy of the Legislative Fiscal Bureau:

Michigan $9,798
Illinois 8,634
Michigan State 8,262
Minnesota 8,599
Ohio State 8,082
Indiana 7,652
Purdue 6,458
UW-Madison 6,280
Iowa 5,612

Ah, but you see, Wisconsin is not “affordable,” since we’re not spending enough taxpayer money on financial aid.  Or are we?

In the 1998-99 fiscal year, the state spent $17.5 million on the Wisconsin Higher Education Grant (WHEG) for UW students.  By 2006-07, that number had more than doubled, to $39.2 million.  (Although, admittedly, it dipped slightly in 06-07 after an immense 22% one-year increase in 2005-06.)  Much of that WHEG increase was implemented to make up for the aforementioned tuition increases meant to offset a general purpose revenue cut to the UW in the 03-05 biennium.

The Measuring Up “study” on which the Journal Sentinel breathlessly reports takes none of this into account.  Nor does it take into account the quality of a university.  Let’s say, for argument’s sake, the University of Mississippi funds a slightly higher percentage of pell grant recipients than Wisconsin.  Does that mean Mississippi is a more desirable school to attend?  Does the fact that (to their credit) the UW-Madison offers a world class education so cheaply factor in at all?

If Wisconsin is serious about keeping school “affordable,” it should look at holding down tuition – not raising tuition, then turning to the taxpayers for even more money to allow lower income students access.  In fact, some studies suggest that increased financial aid has the effect of increasing tuition – if universities know so many government loans and grants are available, they can raise tuition to take advantage of the inflation.

UPDATE:  John Hood at the National Review adds some worthwhile observations.

The Mystery is Gone

December 1, 2008 / / 0 Comments

So tonight I finally got around to watching the last episode of \”The Pickup Artist 2\” on TiVo.  (Unsolicited side note: TiVo is perfect for hipsters who want to show that they\’re into a TV series, but not so into it that they actually rush to the TV when it is on.  It\’s a perfect way to appear to remain detatched, since caring strongly about anything other than Barack Obama is frowned upon.)

For the uninitiated, The Pickup Artist series airs on VH1 – it is a reality show where some gangly Canadian bozo who dresses like a space pirate deems himself the \”Master Pickup Artist,\” and teaches a house full of dorks all the tips to pick up women.  This man goes only by the sobriquet \”Mystery,\” and molds twitchy little freaks into sleazy douchebags who get spray-on tans and wear their headware askance.

For some reason, I can\’t look away from this show.  (Unsolicited side note #2: I subscribe to the Chuck Klosterman theory that there is no such thing as a \”guilty pleasure.\”  Either something gives you pleasure, or it doesn\’t – and if it does, there is absolutely no reason to apologize for it just because some hipster jackass might look down on you for it.)

Every week, the contestants go on \”field tests,\” in which Mystery sends them into a local bar to use whatever invaluable tips he taught them that week to pick up chicks.  The show goes to great lengths to point out that the entire field test exercises are done via hidden camera in real bars with real people.  In many cases, these aspiring lotharios strike out in such spectacular fashion that you actually have to shield your eyes from the painful awkwardness exuding from your television.  But in some instances, the contestants get a phone number, or even a brief makeout session based on their newfound skillzzzz.

But in the real world (in which I sometimes live), these \”field tests\” raise some questions.  At some point, the show\’s producers have to convince the targeted women in that bar to sign a waiver to use their image and voice on television.  This would have to be done after their encounter with the twitchy, freakish contestant.  At this point, the woman would know that she has essentially fallen prey to a scam, which for 98% of human history may have actually embarrassed her a little bit.  But apparently, the desire to be on television at all costs is so strong, they go ahead and sign a waiver saying \”I agree to be on television to show my parents that I am willing to get drunk and play tonsil hockey with a nerdy stranger who just duped me with some pickup ruse.\”

The series finale was interesting, as well.  For one of the field tests (see below) the final two contestants were released into the wild, and the first one to kiss a girl won the contest.  The flaw in this game is obvious: it doesn\’t take into account quality.  One of the contestants could make a bee line for the first ugly woman in the bar, throw out their standard pickup line, and be having a tongue fight within minutes.  What exactly does that prove?

This year\’s winner was the large-lipped Simien, and there\’s an 80% chance he\’s gay.  (One of the previous episodes, in which one of each of the contestants\’ \”friends\” was brought to the house from back home,  heavily alluded to this fact.)  And he really had the lamest pickup line, (or \”opener,\” as Mystery calls it) and he beat it to death.  (\”What movie is \’nobody puts baby in a corner\’ from?  DIRTY DANCING!\”)  His pickup line almost made \”I like pickle juice\” (which was actually used to great effect by a contestant) seem erudite.

Finally, in the last episode, Mystery stocks the house with \”perfect 10s,\” of which the two remaining contestants must choose one to successfully seduce.  (In some cases, the only \”10\” in that house could be achieved by standing three hoochies together.)  Mystery claims that these women are his \”friends.\”  Yet all of the techniques the two romeos use are methods taught by Mystery in Season One of the show.  So if these women were really Mystery\’s friends, wouldn\’t they have watched the show last year and been able to recognize the dopey tricks being played on them?

The real star of the show, however, is Mystery, who treats the entire affair as an infomercial, getting people to sign up and pay thousands of dollars for his traveling seminar on picking up women.  And if you\’d like, you can also fork over some cash for a book detailing his methods called \”The Game.\” The seriousness with which Mystery takes his instruction simply has to be a put-on.  There\’s just nobody that can be that earnestly ridiculous without it being an act.

To get a flavor of the show, click below and see our last two contestants work the room.

The One Thing the Packers Have Going For Them

December 1, 2008 / / 5 Comments

\"\"

A few years ago, everyone scoffed at Al Gore for his goofy proclamation that the debate over global warming was \”over.\”  Yet I am about to make a similar statement with regard to the only issue in Wisconsin that really matters:  After yesterday\’s game, the debate about Brett Favre is now over.

In the aftermath of Favre\’s whole prima donna act, some of you may have simply looked at the New York Jets\’ record, compared it to the Packers\’ record, and made your decision on the validity of the decision to go with Rodgers based on that alone.  If you have said something to yourself along the lines of \”we had everyone coming back from a 13-3 record, and now the Jets are good and the Packers aren\’t,\” then I have news for you – and I cannot mince words on this – you are an idiot.

Despite Rodgers\’ herculean effort yesterday (298 yards, 3 TDs), the defense and special teams once again let the team down, giving up 35 points – after forking over 51 points on Monday night.  It wouldn\’t have mattered if the Packers alternated Jesus Christ and Barack Obama at quarterback yesterday.  It wasn\’t Rodgers\’ fault Mike McCarthy called a ridiculous third down running play with the fullback on the goal line with a minute and a half left – after Rodgers had picked apart the Carolina defense at will while marching them down the field.

Find me a first year quarterback that has had the success Aaron Rodgers has.  What he\’s done has been brilliant – it\’s not his fault Mason Crosby missed a potential game-winning field goal in Minnesota by three feet.  It\’s not his fault teams return kickoffs to the 50 yard line every time.  It\’s not his fault the defense allows one of the top 3 receivers in the NFC to run free with the game on the line.  Those of you who are dying to be critical of Ted Thompson are actually right – but because he has failed to put together a decent defensive line, not because of his decision to keep Rodgers over Favre.

So if you\’re still yearning for the days of Brett Favre – the one, incidentally, who did nothing in his team\’s embarrassing home loss to the Broncos – then feel free to jump ship and root for the Jets.  We\’ll be over here in Wisconsin with the Pro Bowl quarterback for the next decade, while Jets fans will be dealing with Favre\’s Hamlet routine in the offseason.  And when Favre is riding a tractor in a couple years and the Packers are still competitive because of their quarterback, you can send all of us an apology when you come crawling back.

SIDE NOTE:  Not to make excuses for the rest of the team – because they have been bad – but has anyone actually looked at how difficult the Packers\’ schedule has been?  Not only has it been hard, it may be historically hard. (Also the name of a movie on the Spice Channel.)  Through 12 games this year, the Packers have played exactly two teams (Detroit, Seattle) with losing records.  The other 10 games have been against teams .500 or better (Minnesota 7-5, Chicago 6-6, Tampa Bay 9-3, Carolina 9-3, Tennessee, 11-1, Dallas 8-4, New Orleans 6-6, Indianapolis 8-4, Atlanta 8-4).  Combined, those teams have won 72 and lost 36.

By contrast, of the Packers\’ 13 wins last year, nine came against teams that were .500 or worse:

Philadelphia (8-8), Minnesota twice (8-8), Denver (7-9), KC (4-12), Carolina (7-9), Detroit twice (7-9), Oakland (4-12), Saint Louis (3-13)

Those thinking this team was going 13-3 again with Favre based on what they did last year need to seek medical attention immediately.

In the News

November 17, 2008 / / 0 Comments

Well look at that – I made the news for something other than sitting in the cole slaw at the Wendy\’s salad bar.  From Sunday\’s Wisconsin State Journal:

Who\’s to blame for state budget shortfall?

If Gov. Jim Doyle and Republican and Democratic lawmakers now find themselves in a $5 billion budget hole, it\’s because they\’ve all done part of the shoveling, budget experts said.

At least $1.6 billion of the state\’s massive budget shortfall stems from a spend-now, pay-later attitude pervasive in both political parties in the state Capitol, these analysts said.

Gov. Jim Doyle and other state leaders have blamed the two-year projected budget shortfall, which threatens everyone from taxpayers to students and the poor, on the souring economy across the country.

But commentator Christian Schneider, who predicted in January that a mild recession would lead to a $4.2 billion state budget shortfall, said the state also is paying for its failure to live within its means and to set money aside for the crisis that he and others warned could be coming.

\”We learned nothing from the 2001 downturn so now we\’re going to have to go through another painful process with this downturn,\” said Schneider, a fellow at the conservative Wisconsin Policy Research Institute. \”There\’s nobody who\’s without blame in this situation.\”

The impetus for this article appears to be this post I wrote over at the WPRI blog that criticizes legislators for creating a budget deficit, then whining about there being a budget deficit – as if they had nothing to do with it.

Partying Like it\’s 1982

September 28, 2008 / / 0 Comments

\"\"

It was five years ago this week that my daughter was born. In the hospital, holding her for the first time, it was impossible to comprehend the fact that childbirth occurs all the time. It was such a wonderful, unique experience, I was convinced that the little girl in my arms was the first child ever born.

I didn\’t really have the same experience until this afternoon, when the Brewers clinched their first playoff berth in 26 years. It was so unique, so wonderful, it\’s hard to comprehend that teams actually win wild card berths all the time. Granted, they don\’t often win them in the fashion the Brewers did – on the last day in their last at bat and with a superhuman pitching effort. But the sight of Brewers drenching themselves in alcoholic beverages after the game was so alien, I half expected to see a sasquatch pouring champagne on a unicorn in the background of the Brewers\’ clubhouse during the celebration. (Apologies to John Jaha, who drenched himself in alcohol after every game – usually before getting behind the wheel of his car.)

When the Brewers last made the playoffs, I was nine years old. The sounds of Michael Jackson\’s Thriller wafted through our home, and I was convinced I was related to John Schneider of the Dukes of Hazzard. I began to discover the wonders of the female form by watching the 20 Minute Workout.* My dad bought me a Robin Yount jersey for $16, on the condition I pay him back by earning money through chores. I got a quarter for every time I did the dishes – only later was I able to calculate that the old man got 64 nights of dishes out of me to pay for that crummy jersey. He\’s lucky kids can\’t unionize.

Little did I know at the time that I would be 35 years old before I got to see the Brewers in the playoffs again. For the past quarter century, Milwaukee has been known more to the baseball world for our racing sausages and the availablity of our 15-year old girls than the actual baseball our team played. Ironically, Robin Yount is still in the dugout wearing his #19 jersey. That\’s why, after Ryan Braun\’s 8th inning 2-run homer, I suddenly felt tears in my eyes. All at once, I felt 26 years of decompression. At that moment, every burden of the last quarter century was lifted off my back: Every time Geoff Jenkins swung and missed at a curveball by two feet; every news story about how the Seligs were using tax money to pad their wallets instead of fielding a competitive team; every time Derrick Turnbow came in to throw gasoline on the fire, and Ned Yost condescendingly telling the fans we weren\’t seeing what we were clearly seeing – all lifted.

This was in stark contrast to Saturday, when I sat with my head in my hands for the entire game, watching it all slip away. For Saturday and through seven innings on Sunday, I felt like I was cooking in my skin. I actually had to take some ice packs out of the freezer and apply them to my head and shoulders. I\’m not sure if it\’s physically possible to give yourself a fever, but I felt like you could fry an egg on my head. Brewer Fever, indeed. I caught it.

(Speaking of sicknesses, has anybody checked to see if Corey Hart has rubella? A tapeworm, perhaps? If so, can we get the tapeworm to pinch hit for him? How many rallies is he going to be allowed to murder in broad daylight? Is he using a bat made of balsa wood?)

And now, the Brewers are headed for October baseball. I honestly don\’t know how I\’ll react when the first pitch is made on Wednesday. I certainly don\’t expect the Brewers to win, given how they played in Philadelphia just a couple weeks ago – but somehow, I don\’t think having low expectations is going to make me feel any better if they eventually lose. I mean, as poorly as they played at the beginning of September, this team did win 90 games. It\’s not like they\’re incapable of winning.

Sadly, I was notified by the Brewers that I was not chosen to have the opportunity to buy playoff tickets via their lottery. So if they\’re looking to hire someone to sell hot dogs, pretzels, or give Bob Uecker footrubs during the game, count me in.

The Mets-Marlins game ended at about 4:00, just as my daughter\’s soccer game was beginning. So I ran over there after the game had already started. As I got to the sideline, my daughter ran off the field and said \”did the Brewers win?\” Hopefully, in 26 years, her kids will be asking her the same thing.

———————————————————————–

*- One day around that time, I went over to a friend\’s house, and had to use the bathroom. While looking through the bathroom magazine rack, I found this mysterious magazine called \”Playboy.\” It featured a picture of a woman riding a bike wearing nothing but shoes. I immediately ran home and told my mom, asking her \”why would anyone ride a bike without clothes on? THAT\’S CRAZY!\”)

Biden\’s Selection a Huge Step Forward for Gender Equity

August 25, 2008 / / 0 Comments

Political observers on both the left and right are slamming the uninspiring selection of Senator Joe Biden as Barack Obama\’s running mate. The left thinks Obama missed a chance to have a truly historic ticket by passing over Hillary Clinton, who could have been the first woman elected Vice President. The right simply recognizes Biden as a blowhard\’s blowhard, capable of fitting both feet in his mouth, yet still able to hear the sweet sound of his own voice.

\"\"But while some think Biden\’s selection was a step back for gender relations, it\’s clear that it\’s just the opposite. See, for years, female politicians have been held to a different standard when it comes to appearance. While the physical features of male politicians are rarely discussed, women are constantly criticized for their hair, makeup, scarves, and the like. Just look at coverage of Hillary Clinton over the past few years.

Now, with Biden, we have a perfect opportunity to level the gender playing field, as his outrageous hair plugs lend themselves to a discussion of his appearance. Now, when women accuse us of unfairly criticizing their appearance, we can always point to Biden as an example of where we ridiculed his hair. It\’s open season on both genders, and we have the ghost of Biden\’s old hair to thank. Equity!

Biden\’s plugs also raise other questions. Wouldn\’t it be cool to be the guy who donated his hair to the Vice President? Shouldn\’t that give you at least a say who should be labor secretary or something? Maybe partly eligible for the VP\’s pension when he leaves office?

There are some other weird things about the Biden selection. First, they announced it late on a Friday afternoon, at exactly the time when politicians are trying to bury stories. When your congressman is caught trolling for dates at Chuck E. Cheese, chances are he\’s going to tell his side of the story while you\’re driving home on Friday. Apparently, the same goes for announcing the name of a running mate who wears other people\’s hair.

This odd timing might be part of the reason Obama hasn\’t seen any kind of bump from making the Biden selection. It\’s possible not enough people have even heard Obama even selected a running mate, much less be able to judge how good of a pick he is. (For those who aren\’t sure how great Biden is, just listen to Biden himself – he\’ll tell you.)

Perhaps the funniest part of the whole Biden selection is the talking point, repeated religiously by Obama\’s surrogates, that somehow Biden would help Obama with \”blue collar\” workers. Apparently, people working in Washington DC have become so insulated, that they actually believe this. The idea that a 35-year U.S. Senator reflects \”blue collar\” America is simply preposterous. It\’s not like the guy\’s been soldering pipe or sweeping the sawdust out of new homes for the last 20 years. The last time he drove his own car, he was probably listening to the hot new Spandau Ballet hit on the radio.

In the end, the pick of Biden won\’t make any difference either way – just as McCain\’s pick likely won\’t, either. But at least McCain has the decency to man up and sport a good old-fashioned combover. That guy\’s tough as leather.

Other fun fact of the day: An anagram for \”Obama/Biden\” is \”Babe Domain.\”

Wiley Falls Off His Horse

August 21, 2008 / / 4 Comments

On this very blog in May, I wrote a glowing post about outgoing UW-Madison Chancellor John Wiley, in which I praised his commitment to ideological diversity during his tenure. While I stand by everything I wrote at the time, I now fear for Wiley\’s well being, as it appears he may have been hit in the head by a blunt object since then.

This week in Madison Magazine, Wiley unleashes a ridiculously unhinged, factually challenged screed against Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce, the state\’s largest business organization. The entire vitriolic commentary smacks of typical academic elitism – if you disagree with him, you are either evil or stupid. But in effect, it trots out the same talking points any lazy liberal would use to take aim at the business community. Unfortunately, a freshman political science student at UW-Madison could do a better job of researching the facts.

To their credit, WMC has merely shrugged off Wiley\’s ridiculous attack. But such an inaccurate use of the facts from a person who should know better deserves a more thorough response.

First, Wiley trots out the old canard that the UW System is underfunded:

With almost no exceptions, everyone agreed that we can\’t grow our future economy without significant new investments in education–or at least a restoration of some of the last fifteen years worth of cuts.

According to the Legislative Fiscal Bureau, the total UW budget was $2.5 billion in 1996-97. By 2006-07, just 10 years later, the total system budget had ballooned to $4.3 billion, an average increase of 5.7% per year over a decade. Of that budget, state general purpose revenue increased every year from 1996-97 ($844 million) to 2002-03 ($1.08 billion), until Governor Jim Doyle proposed cutting $250 million from the system over a two-year period. (Shame on WMC for getting Doyle elected.) By 2006-07, state aid had increased to 1.04 billion per year, with the Legislature granting campuses the authority to levy $909 million in tuition – more than twice the $400 million they collected in 1996-97.

Wiley goes on to blame WMC for the \”toxic\” political environment in Wisconsin, as if there has never been tension between those who want to raise taxes and lower them. Apparently, campaigning for lower taxes is a completely new phenomenon in Wisconsin, thanks to the business lobby, trying to represent the interest of their members. (A concept that is alien, apparently, to the teachers\’ union, trial lawyer lobby, casino interests… you get the picture.)

Even more odd is Wiley\’s attempt to blame WMC for a slew of legislative initiatives:

For the last fifteen years of Wisconsin\’s declining fortunes, the candidates WMC has supported for elective office have been the very ones who, when elected, have concentrated their efforts on opposing stem cell research and domestic partner benefits, pushing a cleverly named but economically devastating \”taxpayer bill of rights,\” fussing over the definition of \”marriage,\” hauling universities before staged hearings to defend our efforts to prepare ethnic minority students for the workforce, railing against the personal views of otherwise obscure instructors, resisting any form of gun control, proposing mandatory arming of teachers, demanding the illegal summary firing of named state employees and proposing the elimination of the state\’s only public law school.

Set aside, for the moment, the issues of \”the definition of marriage\” (which passed a public vote with 60%) and the \”economically devastating\” attempt to limit the growth of government. He blames WMC for helping elect representatives who were critical of the UW for hiring 9-11 conspiracy theorist Kevin Barrett to teach a course on Islam. He is, of course, talking about State Representative Steve Nass, who represents a 70% Republican district, and who has likely only received minimal campaign help from WMC. Likewise for State Representative Frank Lasee, who proposed eliminating the UW-Madison law school – a terrible idea, but another legislator who probably hasn\’t ever received any real help from WMC. In fact, the more moderate the legislator is, the more likely they are to have WMC help them – since they are more likely in a competitive district.

And I challenge Wiley to come up with a single legislator who opposes \”any form of gun control,\” or who supports \”mandatory arming of teachers.\” These examples are completely fabricated.

So Wiley\’s calculus works like this: WMC generally supports conservative candidates, who vow to keep taxes down. That means they are on the hook for every Republican bill that might be introduced, whether it passes or not, whether it\’s nutty or not, or whether or not it only exists in Wiley\’s imagination.

Wiley then moves on to the favorite talking point of liberals in Wisconsin – that somehow, every dollar we spend on prisons in Wisconsin takes away funds from the UW System. He says:

Can anyone explain or justify the fact that, according to 2007 Census figures, Wisconsin has 22,966 people incarcerated when our sister state of Minnesota has only 8,757? Are Wisconsin citizens that much more criminally inclined? What does Minnesota know that we don\’t? How much money could we save if Wisconsin judges had greater latitude for exercising sentencing judgment, or if we adopted control and monitoring measures other than expensive incarceration (about $30,000 per prisoner per year)? We\’re talking many hundreds of millions of dollars in savings if the governor and the legislature could work together to tackle these badly needed reforms.

I\’d be happy to explain the disparity between Minnesota and Wisconsin, Chancellor. First, Minnesota uses parole – we do not. Second, Minnesota\’s prison system is entirely different than Wisconsin\’s – most offenders are imprisoned at the local level, not the state level – so their numbers are much lower for state prisons.

Furthermore, drawing a comparison between providing funding for a prisoner and a UW student is a bogus exercise. Yes – we spend more for a prisoner – for instance, someone who may have stabbed someone else to death. We\’re paying to keep the public safe by keeping this guy locked up. To say that money is morally equivalent to making sure some marginal student at UW-Stout doesn\’t have to work a few extra hours at Taco Bell to help pay tuition is misguided. All Wiley has to do is start naming the people he thinks should be let out of prison, and we can start the debate.

Wiley\’s solutions to the toxic political environment? Simple – make the legislature part-time and eliminate most of the local governments in the state. Oh, and set up a \”blue ribbon\” bi-partisan panel to suggest changes. Man, if only someone had thought of that stuff sooner. Sadly, trees had to die to print out those earth-moving recommendations, none of which has any chance of passing.

Yet, apparently those changes are what are necessary to keep Wisconsin from – and I hope you\’re sitting down – becoming a \”permanent third-world state.\” Honestly, if any political science student at UW-Madison used that kind of hyperbole in one of their research papers, they should be forced to re-take the course (unless it was taught by Kevin Barrett.)

Let\’s review – only spending $4.3 billion per year on the UW System is going to make us a \”third-world\” state. As if, suddenly, you\’ll have to sit at your work computer covered in flies, with a distended belly. On the plus side, it may mean Wisconsin has some better Olympic long distance runners.

There\’s a lot more stuff in there, but there are really only so many hours in the day. It\’s just too bad that John Wiley has only recently discovered that the UW-Madison has been a thorn in the side of the Legislature for over a century. Somehow, I think we\’ll survive.

More Favrenalia

July 17, 2008 / / 0 Comments

With regard to the Packers\’ allegations against the Vikings for tampering with Brett Favre – the AP reports that Favre and Viking offensive coordinator (and former Badger) Darrell Bevell are good friends:

\”The person said the league already has reviewed evidence provided by the Packers, and team officials believe a league examination of telephone records would indicate more than “normal contact” between Favre and Vikings offensive coordinator Darrell Bevell, a former Green Bay assistant.\”

Set aside for, a moment, all the jokes about what \”more than normal contact\” means. Here\’s the smoking gun:

\"\"

If that\’s not proof, I don\’t know what is.

Today, this came through the wire at the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel:

\"\"

Carlene and Duane Schultz thought creating a corn maze featuring Brett Favre\’s image on a Wisconsin farm would be anything but controversial.

The husband and wife said Favre is still welcome at the Schultz\’s Country Barn in Eleva, even though they\’ve received a few grumbling comments after the quarterback said he was considering a comeback and wanted a release from the Packers.

The Schultzes have had mazes created in their cornfield for the past three years and sold tickets for people to walk through it. The couple decided this spring to use Favre\’s image as a \”thank you\” after the quarterback announced his retirement.

Aren\’t children in Africa dying because we\’re in the midst of a corn shortage? Shouldn\’t Duane Schultz be making ethanol or something?

And finally, WisconsinEye recently filmed a few segments of the Joy Cardin Show on Wisconsin Public Radio. (I am biased, as I\’ve been on the show a couple times.) This segment includes a really interesting take by MATC history instructor Jonathan Pollack, who discusses the news about Favre in the larger context of Wisconsin culture. It\’s worth a watch.

« Older posts Newer posts »

© 2024 Christian Schneider

Follow me at Mastodon